UniqueTII

I have never run against a 5.0 that even came close to keeping up with me. Maybe it's because they don't age very well...I don't know, but I run a 14.12, and if they run low 14s, they shouldn't be watching my tail pipes.

von

U guys swere like u know what your talking about. what about 95-96 GTs. I lost to one that had intake and exaust by 1 car 0-100. Im doing 14.9 in the 1/4 in my 89gxl and beat a 3000gtsl 94 that gets 15.3. Also beat a new 2002 Eclipst GTS with intake and various other cars . I know all these people to and know thier car inside and out. Funny people say an N/A will only do 15s at best when they dont know ****. I dont even have headers yet or any kind of street port. Most modded N/As beat the crap out of mustang GTs 95-96 like mazdaspeed7 and bambam. So whats up?

AbecX

Actually its 94 - 95 Mustangs, and they are slow as ****. They had about 175 to the wheels and weighed 3500#'s The 96-98 were much better but not by far. I guess will find out when I take my entirely stock rx7 to the track and see what it runs.

Pabmosc

Dude Mustangs are huge tanks, like 3400-3500 punds.
And only 217 stock. I know from personal experience that a 2600 pund fully independent suspension, almost perfect weight distribution 2nd gen is gonna give it good *** comp if not beat it.
All I have in my car is a cat back, high flow cat and a K&N stock replacement filter, giving me like fifteen extra for a total of what 160 horses. I walk on 5.0's. those cars start flapping and hopping the rear end under hard cornering. they might get a head start off the line, but I quickly catch up.

cbrock

iTrader: (1)

Yeah...the last of the 5.0 sucked. I've driven a few and rode in a few and was not impressed. Seemed like my 82 Delta 88 But seriously, at the track I've seen the ol fox body FIVE-O's run 16's, 15's. I blew the doors off of a 93 cobra (appeared stock) at dragway 42 in OH. I believe he ran a 14.9@93 and I ran (K&N only, TII) 14.5@98.5. Hell, Corvettes from that era (late 80's early 90's) are maybe mid to low 14's. Then again, I ran against an 87 LX with a 5.8 supercharged/aftercooled nitrous car in my 11 sec talon and got my *** kicked. Found out later he runs mid 9's. But stock mustangs are pretty poor. They are however, getting much better:MotorTrend, GT 4.6L 14.1 and the cobra with a 13.9. All of this can be yours for $30,000.

dre_2ooo

SLOW Mustang V8's : Numbers don't lie
1994 Ford Mustang GT 5.0L 15.7@88 mph
1993 Ford Mustang GT (conv) 5.0L 16.1 @85 mph
1991 Ford Mustang GT 5.0L 15.6@91 mph
1988 Ford Mustang GT 5.0L 15.8@87 mph
1985 Ford Mustang GT 5.0L 15.9@85 mph

So, tell me how my high 14/low 15sec N/A can't beat one of these

Even worse are the V6's :

1995 Ford Mustang 17.3 secs 1/4 mile (yes, 17.3 )
1994 Ford Mustang 16.8 secs 1/4 mile

And you're telling me a 16 sec N/A doesn't win here too


The only mustangs that beat me are the NEW fast ones. Which are, quite fast.

1999 Ford Mustang GT 14.2@98 mph
2001 Ford Mustang GT 14.0@100 mph
2001 Ford Mustang GT (conv) 14.7@96 mph

And the NEW V6 is still slower than me.. but it's pretty fast for a V6 powered boat.

2000 Ford Mustang 15.5@84 mph
1999 Ford Mustang 15.6@90 mph


SO! I guess we are all arguing about different years here. When I say I "take down the big boys," I'm refering to the older, slower, V8 'stangs .

wpgrexx

dude, you don't ever shut up about the mustangs do u. go to a mustang page already and stop talking ****, if you don't think it happens fine, I know it does. And so do alot of other people here. and about your 302's running 7's and 8's, evr heard of Aam Saruwatari or his rx7. probably not. your crutch is ignorance

AbecX

I cant even think about the number of mustangs running in NHRA that run that, compared to the 1 or 2 rotary powered ones that do it.

And yes, those numbers listed above are the slow mustangs but the 91 and 88 are much faster, in fact the 88 speed density's were in the mid 13's hell, my 90 ran ******* 13.7's all stock with slicks on the back, the 1991's were exaclty the same. Why dont you post up the stock rx7 numbers and compare. Who the hell races a automatic convertable mustang LOL!

wpgrexx

okay, hold on abecx, dre2000 listed 88 5.0 at 15.8 and 91 15.6, what was so special in 90 that u dropped 2 seconds in stock form, those must be some crazy *** tire to drop 2 seconds. btw, shutup about the pos crapstangs. people here have beaten them, i have beaten some, if your experience in life points to something dofferent than 80% of the people here, WOW, you are my freaking hero. can i get an autograph, maybe a picture with you and than you autograph that, or maybe.... you can just shutup

AbecX

Are you stupid or just ignorant and stuck on the mindset of an rx7? I have never said mustangs are the end all be all, in fact I've played with chevy and pontiac small block as well. Maybe if you've ever actually BEEN to a track you would see these numbers. Saying you can beat stock mustangs is totally off the wall stupid, take it to the track and you'll see what I'm talking about, I bet your still hanging out in the 16's

wpgrexx

where do you get 16's from. christ man you don't read do u, or you can't read thats' it. u are so dumb u can't read , ahhhh it alll makes sense now. how many different people on here have put numbers down in front of you, or how many people have to tell u that they can beat a mustang in their rx7 for u to maybe think it is possible. just read what is written on the shiny screen in front of your face.

AbecX

According to rx7.com, the fastest NA rx7 is a 14.01, SOOooo IMPRESSIVE

Gecko_7

Ok I had both, I still have a 87 Mustang 5.0 LX and now I drive a 90 TII. The mustang FEELS way quicker because of the torque and the 7 doesnt feel as fast but is faster. I raced my Buddy who drives a 88 LX 5.0 Convertible. The thing is COMPLETLY STOCK and he ran 13.9 and has the slip to prove it or i wouldnt of believed him. We raced and he beat me by 2 car lenghts when he was powershifting. When he just shifted normal we were side by side.

What im trying to say is if a guy in the stang doesnt know how to drive the car hes gonna get killed. But if hes a good driver a N/A 7 has no chance in hell if its stock, maybe if its bridgeported etc etc.

BTW my buddy has been drag racing alot and if any one in the toronto area doesnt believe me come down and have a run for urself.

wpgrexx

than the guys i have raced don't know how to drive, like i said originally, a long long post ago, in a thread far far away, when my car was stock it did not beat it, i kept up, there is a huge difference. now that my car is modded it can beat some. should I draw pictures for abec to understand. btw gecko 7 are u coming down to peg cuty for the canadian meet?

AbecX

Your numbers mean jack to me, I'll find out as soon as I take this car to the track to see if its a turd or not.

wpgrexx

if u don't know that a full dual exhaust will give more than 10 hp, how in the hell will u know if your car is running right, it could be running on one rotor and u probably wouldn't know.

AbecX

wpgrexx, I've tuned plenty of cars to know when one isnt running right, according to the compression test its fine, I am going to check the air fuel ratio next and get some decent gas into it.

wpgrexx

make sure you use a compression tester specific for rotories, because their is an important difference. if you know so much, why don't you believe experienced tuners, especially mazdatrix

AbecX

I have no idea who these people are. I am just stating facts from what I've seen, nothing but slowness out of them. And you dont have to have a special compression tester to test them, all you have to do is hold the release valve.

wpgrexx

i guess that is why mazda made a special tool just for them.

rxspd

Abec, what is the deal, every thread on here with you posting has to become a stang-7 flame war. Why the hell did you buy that 7 if you think they are such pos's? Why dont you go over to stangnet, and talk about mustangs, this is a RX7 forum not a mustang forum.
Jason

Shounen

Maybe the fastest 2 rotor N/A, but how about we upgrade that 2 rotor (V6 equivalent) to a 3 rotor (V8 equivalent).

Just dropped off some major time. way more than just a mere 14.01.

my 2 cents

wpgrexx

i am glad i am finally getting some back up to maybe try and educate this guy a little. I have been trying for two days to explain that an exhaust system will give an rx7 a significant increase in power, he doesn't want to believe me. help this guy, learn him the ways of the rotor

Shounen

Well with any car really,

You increase the potential air flow through the engine allowing more fuel and air, creating more power.

Opening the intake and the exhaust can provide quite a substantial power gain, even on an N/A.

Also I am not sure, but from the design of the rotary it looks as though the rotary flows air a little better than a piston engine as well (air is constantly moving in one direction instead of back and forth).
Correct me if I am wrong.

AbecX

Thats pretty slow, I know its a 1.3L engine and all but a 14.01 maxed out n/a isnt very impressive yet people on here are telling me they kill stock mustangs that run these numbers stock. I highly doubt it that every 2nd Gen rx7 can hit these stock numbers in a n/a. I've been the one getting flamed, and I've bought up multiple other engines as well in other threads, I am not trying to flame anyone, just trying to figure out why some people dont understand why adding a K&N filter doesnt add 20rwhp or exhaust adds 28% more power, thats just retarded of a claim. Maybe if the base line was a car with clogged cats and dents all in the tubing.